openDemocracy (oD):
What have been the most pressing questions for you in World Forum for Democracy,
2015?

Anne Brasseur (AB):
When we picked the topic for this year’s forum, Freedom versus control, it was after the Snowden revelations. But
today, a couple of days after the atrocities in Paris, the topic is even more
important. In my opening address of the Forum, I presented a few ideas which I
think can help us make sense of these events. Freedom
can be abused of course, but there can also be abuse of control.

First is the danger of populism, which is feeding hatred. We
have to stand together and we need more solidarity. Our No Hate campaign is
more important than ever. The response we have to give to this threat to our freedom
is the following: there must be some control, but only as long as it strengthens
our democracies and our freedom.

Freedom can be abused of course, but there can also be abuse
of control. There are many examples in history. I’m thinking of Joseph Fouché,
during the French revolution, who based his power on the knowledge presented
only to him by his secret police, or Edgard J. Hoover. Surveillance will always
be present. it is not a risk in itself. But the abuse of surveillance is. We
need democratic control over that control. We need
democratic control over that control.

As politicians, we have to say clearly that there isn’t a
free society without some level of security risk. For too long - and some politicians
continue to do this today - we tried to tell people that the state can do
everything, and that the state can ensure the security of everybody, and
through that, remove the need for individual responsibility. But freedom is
also linked to individual responsibility. It’s very important that the state
ensures that people can take care of themselves, and take responsibility. Otherwise,
we are going to see more and more restrictions, and we’ll witness a society
defined by more and more control, while not being entirely sure by whom. This
is very dangerous.

Do we need more control now? Yes. But we need to make sure
this control isn’t out of control.

oD: What type of
safeguards should we introduce to prevent this?

AB: As
parliamentarians, and local politicians, we have to answer to our constituents.
They have questions, and we have to be able to give them answers. If we leave
them with no answer, or no-answers, this leads to a feeling of insecurity, and
that leads to fear. What we need to avoid - or, since it has already started, to counteract - is making a link between terrorism and migration.

Fear is the worst counsellor, and could drive our citizens
into the arms of populists. So I think that the main message for us, as
national parliamentarians, and local elected politicians, is that we have more
than ever to talk to people. What we need to avoid - or, since it has already
started, to counteract - is making a link between terrorism and migration. We are
calling the people who have themselves been fleeing terrorism, terrorists. This
also is very dangerous.

We have to look for positive actions in the sea of negatives
pictures we see today. In Germany, for instance, there are communities that
have been very warmly welcoming refugees. There’s one village, for example,
which has been able to keep open the school that was about to close, because of
the children of refugees who have settled in the village. This is an example
where the welcoming refugees has benefited the whole community. Migration is a
global issue that requires global solutions, but also local action. We have to show the good examples.

At the Forum, I had the opportunity to meet two young men.
The first was detained in Guantanamo, to which he referred as the “best school
for terrorism”. The second was a former neo-Nazi in Germany, who got out of the
movement with the help of Exit, a local organisation. I think these two types
of radicalisation work in similar ways. So I think that to address the issue of
radicalism, we need to work with young people to get the message against hate
and fear through. Migration is a global issue that requires global solutions, but also local action.

Wherever I go, I try to convince people to join the Council
of Europe’s No Hate campaign. I had an audience with the Pope two months ago, and
he immediately accepted the invitation. Jean Claude-Juncker, and the Secretary
General International Olympic Committee in Lausanne, have recently joined as
well. As leaders, we have to overcome all of our historical, political,
cultural divides and work towards building trust between communities.

President
Lyndon B.Johnson meets with Martin Luther King at the signing of the Voting
Rights Act of 1965. Wikicommons/Yoichi Okamoto. Some rights reserved.

oD: What’s a good way
to build momentum to enhance trust between communities?

AB: A good way is
through personal contact. People have different functions, but they are all
human beings. Everybody who has some form of responsibility, in sports, in
religion, in politics or in civil society, they all want to say no to hate.
Dialogue is the most important element, across differences, however difficult
it might be.

My mandate as President of the Parliamentary Assembly of the
Council of Europe will end in January, but I will stay on as a member of the
campaign, and perhaps I will have even more time for it.

I might use that to work more on the religious dimension of
intercultural dialogue, in which I’ve been involved for many years. I will
continue to see religious leaders. I had the opportunity to use my mandate as President
to build up a good network.

Today, you have calls from people such as Mr Jeb Bush in the
US, who has suggested that refugees be listed according to whether they are Christian
or not. But this is not Christian. I am not a believer, but I am very
interested in the religious dimension. If I understand Christianity’s message,
it’s a message of openness, of tolerance, of accepting everybody. It’s in the
Bible. It’s the politicians who use religion to discriminate. Not the religious
leaders.

There is an acute and growing tension between the concern for safety and the protection of our freedoms. How do we handle this? Read more from the World Forum for Democracy partnership.

About the authors

Anne Brasseur is a Luxembourgish
politician, former sports and training minister and President of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.
A one-year renewable term, Anne is the second woman to hold this post. She is
president of the Association des femmes liberals and since 2009, president of
the The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe in the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe.

David Krivanek is an Associate Editor of openDemocracy. He was previously editor of Can Europe Make It? and digitaLiberties. He currently works for an international organisation in Beirut.

This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.
If you have any queries about republishing please contact us.
Please check individual images for licensing details.

Recent comments

openDemocracy is an independent, non-profit global media outlet, covering world affairs, ideas and culture, which seeks to challenge power and encourage democratic debate across the world. We publish high-quality investigative reporting and analysis; we train and mentor journalists and wider civil society; we publish in Russian, Arabic, Spanish and Portuguese and English.